Vanquinho.

Oh you took it personally I see Thought I was tilted and bitterly having a go at St Johnstone, rather than pointing out facts clearly observable by anyone.

Truly mental how you can be 1 up and pumping one of the worst away mobs Easter Road has ever seen and just give them 2 goals like that. Hibs are box office stuff.

Aye two scoops of grounds in my latest coffee is a bit much. Sorry.

Melkersen was that wee quiet awkward laddy in school eh.. Habitual stalker if he never played football imo.

Buzzing for all the c*nts that will be complaining that Hibs fans are acting as if they won the cup already

Something about him and Darren McGregor being Leith boys and Hibs fans/players.

Motherwell turned it round and credit to them for that. Made Maloney shite it by bringing on a CB for a midfielder.

How is that a yellow for Allan?

Fucking wee p***k, cannae stand wee c***s like that.

Omega-cringe imo.

Folk scrambling for the delete button as we speak.

Second yin is a bit borderline for me, don't think a red would have been harsh.

Collum got both those early card decisions spot on. Dunno what folk are spraffing about.

Bold of you to assume OF fans give a toss about winning this cup. This is just any other Sunday to them.

I cannae even pretend to be surprised by how bad the refereeing is anymore. Sad sad sad. It's only the Mickey Mouse cup, who cares, etc etc..

Maybe slapping that boy with the Injustice-O-Meter will give it the tweaks I need. But aye, shiter for him as he obviously knew it was a shocker.

I've softened my view in this particular situation because it involves diving, so I can sympathise with your point of view in this case due to that fact, as there is definitely some moral justice in Hibs having been denied the second penalty. Livingston never did any of that sh*te, so I don't think what actually happened is really that bad in the grand scheme. It still resulted in two wrong decisions, which could have been avoided entirely if we had VAR. Question is, did the referee deny the second because he realised Boyle dived and he was duped, or because he thought he himself made the wrong call? If the latter, he's in the wrong, as his own mistake never hurt Livingston. If the former, morally correct enough, even more so if Boyle scored. Perhaps there is a different acceptable course of action to be taken if the attacker simply slips and the referee makes an honest, but bad, call. If the situation involves no cheating, I would stick with my earlier suggested course. Do you think that's fair? Ideally we could just get Boyle sent off and banned for 20 games. That would clear this nonsense up. In my Hibs Hearts semi example though, where both teams cheated, I firmly believe Hibs were fleeced and that's indisputable as far as I'm concerned.

Fair tbf tbh imo.

I see why you say that but I think penalties are a special case. There are only two outcomes of a penalty and the lines between them are very clear, goal or no goal. No goal negates the wrong decision. I'd agree with you if it was something like wrongly given corners, ie the ref can just blow for a non-existent foul as soon as it's taken. If we go with your suggestion of wrongly awarding a decision as game-changing as a penalty, that just creates more big wrong decisions and more opportunities for the wrong outcomes to happen. I say penalties are special because as I suggested, you can pretty much completely remove the injustice done to Livingston by missing the penalty. The more referees 'even it up' when it's already evened itself out (IMO), the more games will be skewed. Here's my favourite example, Hibs v Hearts semi final last season. Hibs cheated for a penalty, missed. In that moment, Hearts were given justice for the bad decision (again, minus the yellow card that should have been given). Later, Hearts cheated for a penalty, scored it. The decision to give Hearts the penalty followed what you suggested, ie wrongly awarding them the penalty after one was wrongly given against them (I don't actually think the ref "evened it up" though, I just think he was shite at catching divers). Had Hibs scored theirs, or Hearts missed theirs, I'd have said "sound, we're all cheating c*nts but at least the cheating never decided the game," and either of those outcomes would have been fine by me (though as a football fan I'd rather they both missed for the sake of true fairness). In my opinion, that game was decided because Hearts cheated better then Hibs cheated (though it was almost worth it because the way they lost the final was absolutely delicious). As an aside, I'd want wee p***ks like Martin Boyle sent off for dives that are as clear as that. Awful stuff, ruins games and sullies the reputation of the entire sport.

I disagree. Boyle dives, gets penalty. The Injustice-O-Meter is now swinging heavily towards Livingston because they just got f*cked. Boyle correctly misses and that immediately evens it up (awright, it's still swinging towards Livi very slightly because he should have been booked). Then Hibs should have been given a penalty later (again assuming it was genuine, have only seen it once), denied. Injustice-O-Meter now pointing heavily towards Hibs. The ideal scenario (ie good refereeing) is that Boyle is booked, and Hibs get the penalty later. If he had scored the penalty, the Injustice-O-Meter would have burst through Martindale's napper, but would have been brought back pretty much to the middle by denying the real one. That all seems pretty logical and reasonable to me.

If he'd scored the cheated penalty, then denying the genuine one (if it was indeed a foul) would have been correct.

Get it up the wee dick tbf, cannae stand that shite.

You've just described the support of every professional football club (and some non-pro) that ever existed. The c*nts that brain, and the c*nts that don't brain.

That would have been a horrific way to deal with it though, considering justice was immediately done for the first one when the diving wee clown missed.